Re: [ga] Elections

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 03:05 10/12/01, Eric Dierker said:
>I sometimes read into Jefseys' writing that he has an anarchist view
>point toward ICANN.
>
>I ask him to deliberate on that point.

1. I want to thank Jeff for his nomination but I do not think I would 
professionally be able to afford the job. I merely spend time on the GA 
during program loadings or compilations. To take it as a real 
responsibility is out of my investment scheme, unless I would find a sponsor.

2. dear Eric, you ask a good question as my actions may look anarchist some 
times. I will certainly explain that again. I will try to keep it short, 
but I am afraid that revisiting the whole ICANN and Internet may ask for a 
few lines.

My position is absolutely the reverse to anarchy. The Internet is 
technically a space of liberty. It is an interconnecting system what makes 
it totally distributed on a peer to peer architecture so any attempt to 
manage it as a star network (like the ICANN tries) or even as a meshed 
system as the ccTLDs try in organization themselves is a technical, social, 
commercial, political violation of the system architecture and 
participants' and world's legitimate expectations. So we may expect that on 
the short range - as we see the ICANN or on the medium range as we feel the 
ccTLDs, it will not work and will create us a major problem.

I only recently realized that by chance I am one of the very few who 
experienced the way a peer to peer system of real magnitude (the 
international public packet service cooperated by public monopolies of the 
time) could work, make money, satisfy tens of thousands of users worldwide 
and the way it is be developed, built, deployed, operated, managed, 
marketed, supported and administered. Many others have thought, have 
planed, have dreamed about that: I got the chance to be paid by it for 
years. So I know that it works, how it works and why it works. At that 
level I think that only Joe Rinde, to some extent Bob Trehin, Jack 
McDonnell, Neil Sullivan and Bob McCormick experienced the same in the 
whole world, and to some very lower extent Bob Harcharick, the former boss 
of Vint Cerf.

This is why I say the ICANN mission creep is blocking the world 
development. This is why I say the "alt(sic)root" issue is of interest but 
only as a temporary patch to the real question of the name space 
management. This is why I want the ICANN to assume fully and only its 
mission of light IANA registry functions as this is the best and only way 
to help the Internet resuming its contribution to the world's development. 
You may have noticed that the new economy crisis came at the time of Mike 
Roberts' TLD applications fee, of lack of portable IP addresses provision 
by ICANN and of international domain name uncertain announcement. These 
were odd elements of  instability which contributed to the loss of trust in 
the Internet imperial development.

You see Internet is not a leader of the world's development. It is both 
"only" its mirror and its agent. As such it is the image of the people: it 
must reflect you and your dotcommers positions and address your needs. But 
as such it also must be an help for you and for all of them to make a new 
social step. The most rewarding news for me this last year was the creation 
of two aborigine TLDs. The Internet belongs to the people because it is the 
people. It only show the new ways the society is organizing: governance is 
not something particular to the Internet, it is a very common system 
developing everywhere to manage community consensus. Belgium - who 
presently conducts the EEC - wants to make it the next European workshop 
after the Euro. We are here talking about more serious things than the 
Staff secret meetings.

So what you name my anarchy is only the firm belief that any messing 
against inadequate (non governance) structurations, creep and greed will 
ultimately protect every of us, allowing the community inner forces to 
stabilize us in a proper new order. Because this is the way the world 
always proceeded. Since I saw it working before at real international and 
Government level - I was a very small member of the State Department 
delegation at the CCITT (now ITU/T) and related with many Govs through the 
State Monopolies - I know it will happen again necessarily and that the 
ICANN stiffness and wrong network understanding is just delaying us. So 
delaying the ICANN until the ICANN understands is just saving us time, 
money, lifes and souls as the Internet is something serious for the world 
economy, people's health and common cultural deployment. Hence my demand 
that the ICANN considers its acts not to enlarge unwillingly the financial, 
lingual and digital divides, what I believe it really does without noticing 
it.

For you to understand simply in simple words. On a star or on a meshed 
network the user station is considered as part of a tight or of a lose 
whole and therefore is controlled by others. Two systems you know well are 
used as models by the ICANN thinking: the XIXth century inherited legal 
system for Joe Sims and Louis Touton and the XXth telephone systems for 
many others.

In a distributed system the boss is you. You control the system to see if 
it feet your needs and you use the services or the tools you want to do it. 
If we keep the image of mobiles : the mobile phones are a meshed network, 
the walkie-talkies are a distributed system. The difference is that in a 
real Internet architecture the ICANN is not the boss, it is the servant. 
For example its mission is to help you managing *your* root. For your own 
global private virtual network you shape the way you want with the 
connections you want and the banners you decide to accept.

We could go very far in explaining how it works and pays. The only thing 
you have really to know is that it happens that the three components of our 
today Internet - the IP addresses, the TCP/IP protocol set and the DNS - 
are transparent to these philosophies of use. This means that stability and 
security do not depend on the ICANN - ICANN is a threat as long as it wants 
to be directive and is a help as soon as they accept to serve (Good Book 
says that if you want to be the boss you have to be the servant). Stability 
and security only depend on your own machine architecture which has nothing 
to do with IETF.

If you want to keep going the Microsoft way and use Passport, whois, the 
USG root ... please do it.  You only subcontract these services. If you 
want to adopt a QuiEst approach, run your own root for your own global 
virtual private network you will forget about most of the ICANN except as 
being a convenient source of organized information you may want to use or 
event to contribute to, according to its published and equal to all ICP 
rules. You will even pay it for that service if you like it, the same as 
you do it today with McAffee or F-Prot to get a virus protection.


Now, this long explanation being given, you see that the role of a Chair in 
a distributed environment is not to be a pusher as in a star network or a 
leader as in a meshed system (our world now is more and more distributed 
and the e-mail system is the best example of the force behind of this 
change: polylogue - as monologue goes with star network and dialogue with 
meshed systems). His role is to be a catalyst. And this is far more complex!

Jefsey
























  

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html